Better Journalism in an ever changing digital age

Menu

Debate: Is Oscar Pistorius Guilty?

The Trial of Oscar Pistorius.

A sexed up Reality TV drama?

After a heavy trial and public display, Oscar Pistorius’ trial has simmered down, for now, with the public eye. There is however one question everyone wishes to know. Is Oscar Pistorius guilty for the murder of girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp?

Whilst I am no professional in the field of court judge as many others, (which we also respect) we do see further into a situation than many others cannot see. Everyone wants to see the public details on offer to play public detective in this new guessing game, which also undermines the trial and the judicial system in part to the likening of celebritism. Pistorius is not guilty. Whether you like or hate him for his gun culture, attitude of carelessness and seen to be uncaring nature when articulating himself, the state have problems. They have a deceased body on their hands. That’s a fact. Pistorius killed her. That’s a fact. However, it is insanely immoral to prosecute someone, or anyone, for that matter simply because you need a fall guy. Throwing the book at him because the public are watching and the state of South Africa feels it needs to show the judicial system works by sending someone down is rather convoluted.

Pistorius may have a tough past and horrible gun culture experience, but you cannot go after someone for a public display of fear-mongering, either. He can hope to educate himself better on his use of firearms, like others in society should.

Let’s look a little deeper. While his mind may not work like the rest of us logical thinkers, many faced with intrusion do not have time to be rational. Pistorius, a cripple with artificial legs hears a noise in the middle of the night that wakes him. He’s in bed with no legs. He thinks his girlfriend is next to him. He doesn’t have enough time to get up and shoo a suspected burglar at close proximity away. He has limited time to act, especially for a legless human with impaired movement. He has to get his legs on to move, including fixing them on. It is not rocket science and is a very easy case to attack for a prosecution.

Let’s be clear. We are not the law. We are not supporters of Pistorius. We are not supporters of Reeva either. We tell it how it is because the world cannot seem to understand how it works without a muddled confliction. Though public opinion and media reports often distorted should not be looked upon to make a agreeable decision. This is a serious case. Someone could go down for a murder. It is crucial to obtain the correct result than to get any one for a public on-look. It is very saddening that this happened, and should be a sign to anyone in similar thought positions of burglars to think differently before acting, even if it is limited. Though in certain situations a victim of robbery needs to be allowed self-defence.

The Hollywood glamour of a public trial is debatable for Open Justice as whether it advances or desabilises court proceedings. While Open Justice is fundamental to democracy and needed, is this case sexed up for media thrill more than its intentions over a hunky, Olympic Paralympian record breaker and his hot model girlfriend?

Our condolences are with the Steenkamp family, but trying to get someone to justify her death would actually be a sham. If anything, Pistorius could be found guilty of manslaughter or recklessness etc. As for murder, which we must get the ruling of very clear, it is strongly believed this did not occur. He shot her accidentally with a moment of confusion. A heightened experience awakening from a deep sleep to hear noises among you whilst with limited bodily capabilities multiples the distress in such a short time of realisation.

This itself would also be a perfect time for others to consider their relationships to firearms with a level of justification than a grab and shot persepctive, including the law upholders most recently with police forces. Unthoughtful reaction time and reliance on weaponry as a tool of availability is what can often cause multiple distress. Whilst it wont change tomorrow, putting the weapon away for a least a while will no doubt move forward a move constructive approach to humanity and establish a moral high ground which can be respected.

Should we continue on this path, it will be one step closer to defining a relationship of autonomous values with independent thought that changes postiion in society, which will does not sound appreciative, will give higher power as a state citizen. These decisions will be come respected by all and are likely to build together communities even further rather than separating them entirely. This allows publics to have a say, be respected and communicate in rational conversation which may be referred to as a defining change in national perceptions.